04 Aug 06
Originally posted by I14U2NVYes, Einstein did - and discarded it.
Has anyone ever thought about what if you could travel at a speed greater then light?
There is no way to travel *in* the speed of light, therefore no way to get to a superluminous velocity. In order to get a superluminous velocity you have to pass the velocity of light whitout ever having it, hence impossible.
But there is no law sayng that superluminous velocity is forbidden in spe, if you just approve having a mass with a complex unit.
Going *in* the velocity of light involves division by zero and *this* is forbidden by natural law.
04 Aug 06
Originally posted by FabianFnasthanks
Yes, Einstein did - and discarded it.
There is no way to travel *in* the speed of light, therefore no way to get to a superluminous velocity. In order to get a superluminous velocity you have to pass the velocity of light whitout ever having it, hence impossible.
But there is no law sayng that superluminous velocity is forbidden in spe, if you just ...[text shortened]... ing *in* the velocity of light involves division by zero and *this* is forbidden by natural law.
04 Aug 06
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasHe did test it but with high speed planes (not light speed, thought to be impossible which it is). He used sensitive atomic clocks and yes it did work with one clock being 0.0000...1 s off from the stationary clock.
Yes, Einstein did - and discarded it.
I could be wrong, correct me if I am.
It is impossible to travel faster than light because you would infinte amount of fuel. However my science teacher said that when outside our universe you travel as fast as you want, no limits.
06 Aug 06
I14U2NV asked:
"Has anyone ever thought about what if you could travel at a speed greater then light?"
I, Fabian Fnas, answered:
"Yes, Einstein did - and discarded it."
Knight Square says:
"He did test it but with high speed planes"
I say:
No, Einstein didn't do it. It was other scientists group that did.
Knight Square says further:
"It is impossible to travel faster than light because you would infinite amount of fuel."
I say:
Yes, with our technology. We don't know of the technology of the future.
However going *in* the velocity of light involves division by zero and is therefore impossible. No, technology can alter that.
Anyone hypothizing about 'outside the universe', teacher or not, should know that this involves a great deal of speculation. There is no theory that is seriously dealing with this kind of speculations.
The limits of flight could equally be lower than speed of light than higher, even zero speed. And this is also a speculation.
07 Aug 06
Originally posted by Knight SquareTo answer the original question:
There might be a thread on this, but if I went back into the past and killied my grandfather when he was a boy, wat would happen? Who killied my grandfather? Confusing Paradox.
The two possibilities are:
A: You succeed and exist in a alternate universe in which he did die and you were not born, but exist.
B: You fail and continue to live as person (or your remains depending on how much you failed) while you are born and grow up.
These discount any moral questions of a soul, duplicate particles (a loop in space time there), or the fact that the only conceivable time travel device (a wormhole) would end up being a feedback loop of energy.
08 Aug 06
Originally posted by FabianFnasThen why do think of this? we will never reach the ends of the universe. In my mind it is just impossible, and the ideas of other scientists on the Nat. Geo. channel.
I14U2NV asked:
"Has anyone ever thought about what if you could travel at a speed greater then light?"
I, Fabian Fnas, answered:
"Yes, Einstein did - and discarded it."
Knight Square says:
"He did test it but with high speed planes"
I say:
No, Einstein didn't do it. It was other scientists group that did.
Knight Square says further:
"It is im ...[text shortened]... er than speed of light than higher, even zero speed. And this is also a speculation.
08 Aug 06
Originally posted by Knight SquareMany theories support time travel...many theories also support you going back to kill your father and allow you to still exist.
There might be a thread on this, but if I went back into the past and killied my grandfather when he was a boy, wat would happen? Who killied my grandfather? Confusing Paradox.
Consider the simplest theory...when you go back in time, you create an "alternate" or "additional" universe. In this Universe you are able to kill your father and remain alive because you come from a different Universe.
Or, consider that "Time" is not linear, as required by the Paradox. Rather, consider "Time" as non-linear...in other words, all events in the past and all events in the future are occurring simaltaneously, just on different points on the space-time continuum. If you were somehow able to move along the space-time continuum back to a point where you kill your father, you could then move back along the continuum to your orignal point. Now, you may find that the world you come back to has been altered by the death of your father but that's another story.
There are many other theories but you can do your own research. Some theories say yes, some say no....until they prove one, well it's up for grabs.
12 Aug 06
1 edit
Originally posted by Knight SquareHere is my theory
Then why do think of this? we will never reach the ends of the universe. In my mind it is just impossible, and the ideas of other scientists on the Nat. Geo. channel.
Should the human race live long enough, we will have enough time to one day create the means to travel through our universe. We will, one day send out a spacecraft carrying humans and they will have children and their children will have children, they will have the resources to sustain their meager lives. Eventually they are going to reach the end of our universe.
12 Aug 06
Originally posted by I14U2NVThis is (also) a good argument for the non-existence of more advanced aliens. If there were any some of them would surely have reached us by now.
Here is my theory
Should the human race live long enough, we will have enough time to one day create the means to travel through our universe. We will, one day send out a spacecraft carrying humans and they will have children and their children will have children, they will have the resources to sustain their meager lives. Eventually they are going to reach the end of our universe.
12 Aug 06
Originally posted by Knight SquareOh, I'm surprised of this reaction...?
So, he read to many science fiction books. So What!! You are the only person to pick it up. This is a geeky thread to you, right. Look in the mirrior.
I read a lot of science fiction, SF, too (I love the genre) and they present a lot of theories about time travel. But this is theories of SF writers, and SF writers only. They have no bearing in real science, most of them anyway.
I would say there are more scientific theories that exclude the possibility to time travels than include it. But there are more speculations (not theories) about time travel than has any substance in science.
One crucial question about the complex of time travel is:
Does the future exist before we can experience it? Then we have no free will. If we have the free will to do what we want then there is no way possible to travel back in time and hence not possible to manipulate the past. Simple (?) as that.
This is an interesting thread but the 'killing your grandfather' paradox has been discussed in zillion places in zillion times. I would gladly go back in time and kill the individual who came up with this idea. Would this thread exist then? Just asking...
12 Aug 06
1 edit
Originally posted by ThudanBlunderThere seems to always be a catch...I will have to think more about this.
This is (also) a good argument for the non-existence of more advanced aliens. If there were any some of them would surely have reached us by now.
Edit: While I am thinking about this...I need to ask how fast can the fastest spacecraft travel? How far is the farthest starting point from which an advanced alien can be coming from? I guess this is more my answer as to why easily we could still argue there simply not here yet.